The Court's July 1, 1996, order refusing to review a lower court ruling that struck down the University of Texas Law School's affirmative action program.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

TEXAS ET AL.

v.

CHERYL J. HOPWOOD ET AL.

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-1773. Decided July 1, 1996

The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.

Opinion of JUSTICE GINSBURG, with whom JUSTICE SOUTER
joins, respecting the denial of the petition for a writ of certiorari.

Whether it is constitutional for a public college or graduate school to
use race or national origin as a factor in its admissions process is an
issue of great national importance. The petition before us, however,
does not challenge the lower courts' judgments that the particular
admissions procedure used by the University of Texas Law School in
1992 was unconstitutional. Acknowledging that the 1992 admissions
program "has long since been discontinued and will not be reinstated,"
Pet. for Cert. 28, the petitioners do not defend that program in this
Court, see Reply to Brief in Opposition 1, 3; see also Brief for United
States as Amicus Curiae 14, n. 13 ("We agree that the 1992
[admissions] policy was constitutionally flawed . . . ."). Instead,
petitioners challenge the rationale relied on by the Court of Appeals.
"[T]his Court," however, "reviews judgments, not opinions."
Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.,
467 U. S. 837, 842 (1984) (footnote omitted). Accordingly, we must
await a final judgment on a program genuinely in controversy before
addressing the important question raised in this petition. See Reply to
Brief in Opposition 2 ("[A]ll concede this record is inadequate to
assess definitively" the constitutionality of the law school's current
consideration of race in its admissions process.).